Tuesday, 5 February 2013

One concern since the Bayh-Dole Act was passed in the United States has been the
effect of the Act on the direction of research.Would the Bayh-Dole Act—allowing grant recipients such as universities
to take title to government funded invention—make researchers move their
agendas away from basic research to applied research?To many, this would be a negative impact of
the Act; although some would disagree.And, to some, the movement to applied research is not happening fast
enough.I have heard rumors over the
years that some universities have already changed tenure standards for
professors in the “hard” sciences to include things such as, number of company
spin-outs or patents.The other day I
received an email from Technology Transfer Tactics which mentions a possible “policy
change” in tenure standards at Oklahoma State University and a change in
standards at the University of Texas.Apparently, the changes include adding commercialization factors.Here is the text of some of the email:

The push for
commercialization of university research has become more like a giant shove.
Federal and state governments are pinning their hopes on it, economic
development agencies work hard to enable it, and university presidents demand
it. Pitch competitions, accelerators, funding schemes, outreach efforts,
partnerships, incubators, and mentoring programs abound, all trying to
encourage it. But there is one glaring, gigantic disconnect in the innovation
ecosystem: tenure policy.

While the
drumbeat sounds for new models of entrepreneurship and commercialization
support, a very old model -- steeped in the academic traditions of yesteryear
-- presents a major barrier to realizing the full potential of university
innovations. Tenure policies, which reward publishing and teaching but do
nothing to incentivize commercialization, arguably represent the single biggest
missing link in the innovation ecosystem that so many now agree is critical to
economic growth, jobs, and global competitiveness.

These policies
-- if they are adjusted to take commercial-focused research into account --
also represent a tremendous untapped opportunity for universities to unleash a
deluge of research with market potential, by simply rewarding the behavior that
forms the essential foundation for the dynamic innovation activity the world is
clamoring for. But changing the entrenched system is anything but simple.

While most
university systems continue to resist formal recognition of commercialization
activities when evaluating faculty for tenure, a select few have emerged on the
leading edge of this issue. Oklahoma State University and the University of
Texas System have both gone down the road of including commercialization within
their tenure policies. In fact, OSU is currently in the throes of policy
change.* * *

Please join Bryan
T. Allinson, Executive Director of Technology Commercialization for the
University of Texas System - Austin, and Dr. Stephen W. S. McKeever, Vice
President for Research and Technology Transfer with Oklahoma State University,
for this cutting-edge program. These forward-thinking leaders will present case
studies illustrating the key strategies used to gain administration and faculty
support, as well as the specifics of their tenure policy changes. Here’s a
quick look at the agenda:

Laying the foundation for
culture change with:

oTools for creating an open dialogue
with faculty

oOutlining business terms

oEvidence to back up
commercialization vs societal impact: they can coexist!

Strategies for getting buy-in
from university policy-makers

The benefits of including
commercialization as a requirement for tenure consideration

Details of policy changes

Handling push-back from faculty
and/or administration

Tactics for obtaining early
support from key leadership

Wow!Will basic research
be a thing of the past?Changing tenure
standards is extreme and a huge threat to academic freedom that I suspect will
be ultimately very harmful to the production of break through research that
benefits the public. Does anyone have
any information about what is happening at OSU?Also, has anyone’s university changed its tenure policies to include
commercialization-related factors? If so, I am very interested to see your policy.

2 comments:

Anonymous
said...

I know someone with a lectureship at a well known UK university. During his reviews it was made clear that he was expected to bring in money from industry to support his work. That did not happen and a little while later his lectureship has been terminated. I'm not saying that the university is throwing him out because of not bringing money in, but I think it's a factor. So I think commercialisation pressure on academics is already there, especially at the more junior levels, but no one has really studied how powerful or prevalent it is.